We built voice modulation to mask gender in technical interviews

Post by hasenj » Wed, Jun 29, 2016, 9:34 PM UTC

xenadu02 wrote: post #226

randyrand wrote: post #209

Someone off-topic but: Laws forbidding sexual and racial discrimination in hiring are a waste for everyone's time involved. Do I really want to work alongside someone that "isn't racist" or sexist just because the law forbids it? No of course not. I'd rather work next to people that aren't racist and sexists regardless of if the law forbids it. I want to work at companies where people actually want me. How difficult…

You are clearly completely incorrect... Like so obviously incorrect I'm almost shocked to see such a comment here on HN. Making discrimination illegal sends a social signal that the behavior is bad and shouldn't be tolerated. It emboldens those who are slightly anti-discrimination (but part of the majority group) to speak out against it instead of following the herd. The few cases where actual discrimination cases ar…

Post by killface » Wed, Jun 29, 2016, 9:35 PM UTC

balls187 wrote: post #97

> it’s not about systemic bias against women or women being bad at computers or whatever. Rather, it’s about women being bad at dusting themselves off after failing, which, despite everything, is probably a lot easier to fix. This conclusion (imo) should have been bolded. I disagree that getting women to "dust themselves off" is an easier fix than if there were inherent bias against women in interviewing. My theory i…

Post by semi-extrinsic » Wed, Jun 29, 2016, 9:40 PM UTC

Tyr42 wrote: post #198

xienze wrote: post #147

I honestly feel like this sort of thing is a waste of time. Let's pretend someone invents the perfect "gender bias-free" system: no names, no faces, voices are flawlessly transcribed on-the-fly so you can't pick up on speech patterns. What if it works perfectly and you still end up hiring more men than women? I think exercises like this may end up giving people answers they don't want to hear. So, stop wasting time w…

There is evidence to the contrary, where they have run this experiment in the real world. This is for Orchestras. As late as 1970, the top five orchestras in the U.S. had fewer than 5% women. It wasn’t until 1980 that any of these top orchestras had 10% female musicians. But by 1997, they were up to 25% and today some of them are well into the 30s. In the 1970s and 1980s, orchestras began using blind auditions. Candi…

Post by leeny » Wed, Jun 29, 2016, 9:41 PM UTC

t0mbstone wrote: post #201

leeny wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aline from interviewing.io here. Great idea!

You all should record the audio from the original modulated interviews, then play them in both male and female versions to sample sets of separate observer groups that rank the performance of the person being interviewed. That way, you would be isolating the thing you are testing to just the voice, and you would be able to establish controls and a baseline for the exact same interview. The way your test is described…

Post by argonaut » Wed, Jun 29, 2016, 9:43 PM UTC

xienze wrote: post #147

I honestly feel like this sort of thing is a waste of time. Let's pretend someone invents the perfect "gender bias-free" system: no names, no faces, voices are flawlessly transcribed on-the-fly so you can't pick up on speech patterns. What if it works perfectly and you still end up hiring more men than women? I think exercises like this may end up giving people answers they don't want to hear. So, stop wasting time w…